name: choose-framework
description: Select the right strategic framework for your situation through exploratory dialogue. Use when user describes a problem, decision, or challenge; needs structured thinking approach; mentions "strategy", "decision", or "problem-solving"; or asks "how should I think about this?". Creates framework selection briefs in .frameworks-output/ folder.

Choose Framework - Strategic Framework Selection

Overview

This skill helps users select the right strategic framework for their situation through facilitated exploratory dialogue. The approach is structured and evidence-based - matching frameworks to problems using proven selection criteria.

Core principles:
- Evidence-based selection - Match frameworks to situations based on proven criteria
- Exploratory dialogue - Understand context deeply before recommending
- Multiple options - Present 2-3 frameworks with reasoning
- Natural conversation - Conversational flow, not rigid questionnaire
- Clear reasoning - Explain why each framework fits

Output: Framework selection brief saved to .frameworks-output/[session-name]/framework-selection.md

Workflow

Phase 1: Initial Understanding (5-10 minutes)

Goal: Understand user's situation, problem, and context.

Start with open questions:
- "Tell me about the situation or problem you're facing"
- "What are you trying to achieve or decide?"
- "What's the context?" (startup, corporation, personal, career)

Listen for:
- Problem type (strategic, operational, innovation, decision)
- Situation context (stable, changing, uncertain, complex)
- User's role and constraints
- Urgency and timeline
- Stakeholders involved

Set expectations early:
"I'll ask some questions to understand your situation, then recommend 2-3 frameworks that fit best. Sound good?"

Phase 2: Deep Exploration (10-20 minutes)

Goal: Systematically explore 6 key dimensions to match framework to situation.

Key Dimensions (explore all 6):

1. Problem Type
2. Strategic decision (long-term direction)
3. Operational issue (process, execution)
4. Innovation challenge (new product, service, approach)

5. Decision-making need (choice between options)

6. Situation Context

7. Stable (clear cause-effect)
8. Changing (evolving, competitive)
9. Uncertain (multiple unknowns)

10. Complex (interconnected, emergent)

11. Time Horizon

12. Immediate (days/weeks)
13. Short-term (months)

14. Long-term (years)

15. Stakeholders

16. Who's involved?
17. Who's affected?

18. Who needs to buy in?

19. Data Availability

20. Rich data available
21. Some data, some assumptions

22. Mostly unknowns

23. Implementation Complexity

24. Simple (individual action)
25. Moderate (team effort)
26. Complex (organizational change)

How to navigate:

1. Ask questions one at a time - Don't bombard with a list
2. Use discovery questions from references/discovery-questions.md
3. Follow interesting threads - If user reveals something important, explore it
4. Consult selection guide - Use references/framework-selection-guide.md for category details
5. Check warnings - Use references/framework-warnings.md to identify mismatches
6. Mark uncertainties - Note what's unclear

Reference files to consult:
- references/frameworks-index.md - Complete framework catalog with keywords
- references/framework-selection-guide.md - Deep dive on selection dimensions
- references/discovery-questions.md - Question library for exploration
- references/framework-warnings.md - Warning signs and mismatches

Dialogue style:

Good examples:
- "What specifically are you trying to decide?" (clarify problem type)
- "How much is changing in your market/situation?" (assess context)
- "Who else is affected by this decision?" (identify stakeholders)
- "What data do you have vs what are assumptions?" (understand information)

Bad examples:
- Jumping to framework recommendation too quickly
- Not exploring context deeply enough
- Recommending frameworks user has heard of vs best fit
- Failing to explain why framework matches

Key tactics:

1. Clarify problem type:
- Is this about long-term strategy or immediate execution?
- Are you innovating or optimizing?
- Making a decision or solving a problem?

2. Assess situation complexity:
Use Cynefin-like thinking:
- Clear = Simple frameworks (Eisenhower Matrix, Pareto)
- Complicated = Analytical frameworks (Porter's Five Forces, SWOT)
- Complex = Sense-making frameworks (Cynefin, Systems Thinking)
- Chaotic = Fast-cycle frameworks (OODA Loop)

3. Match to role and context:
- Founders/CEOs: Mental Models, Regret Minimization, First Principles
- Product Managers: Jobs-to-be-Done, Design Thinking, RICE
- Strategists: Porter's Five Forces, Blue Ocean, Wardley Mapping
- Operations: Theory of Constraints, Pareto, Systems Thinking

4. Consider time horizon:
- Immediate: OODA Loop, Eisenhower Matrix, Pareto
- Short-term: Design Thinking, Lean Startup, Pre-Mortem
- Long-term: Regret Minimization, Scenario Planning, Wardley Mapping

5. Identify warning signs:
From references/framework-warnings.md:
- Framework too complex for situation (using McKinsey 7S for personal decision)
- Wrong framework type (using strategic framework for operational problem)
- Insufficient data (using quantitative framework without data)

Phase 3: Framework Recommendation (5-10 minutes)

Goal: Present 2-3 best-fit frameworks with clear reasoning.

Structure your recommendation:

# Recommended Frameworks for Your Situation

## Your Situation Summary
[2-3 sentences capturing key dimensions]

---

## 1. [Framework Name] - PRIMARY RECOMMENDATION

**Why it fits:**
- [Reason 1 based on problem type]
- [Reason 2 based on situation context]
- [Reason 3 based on constraints]

**What you'll gain:**
- [Concrete benefit 1]
- [Concrete benefit 2]
- [Concrete benefit 3]

**What it requires:**
- [Time commitment]
- [Data/information needed]
- [Who should be involved]

**Next step:**
Use `/use-framework [framework-name]` to apply it to your situation.

---

## 2. [Framework Name] - STRONG ALTERNATIVE

**Why it fits:**
- [Reason 1]
- [Reason 2]

**When to choose this over #1:**
[Specific conditions where this is better]

**Next step:**
Use `/use-framework [framework-name]` if this resonates more.

---

## 3. [Framework Name] - WORTH CONSIDERING

**Why it might be useful:**
- [Reason 1]
- [Reason 2]

**Best for:**
[Specific scenario or phase where this helps]

---

## ⚠️ Considerations

[Any warnings or important notes about framework application]

## What We Explored

- **Problem Type:** [Strategic/Operational/Innovation/Decision]
- **Context:** [Stable/Changing/Uncertain/Complex]
- **Timeline:** [Immediate/Short/Long-term]
- **Stakeholders:** [Who's involved]
- **Data:** [Rich/Moderate/Limited]
- **Complexity:** [Simple/Moderate/Complex]

Follow-up:
"Which framework resonates most with your situation? I can guide you through applying it with /use-framework [name], or we can explore alternatives if none of these feel right."

Phase 4: Wrap-up and Next Steps (2-5 minutes)

Goal: Create selection brief and offer next actions.

Steps:

1. Propose session name based on situation
2. Use kebab-case: competitive-strategy-analysis, product-prioritization-decision

3. Keep it descriptive

4. Create framework selection brief:
   .frameworks-output/[session-name]/ └── framework-selection.md

5. Document structure:

6. Situation analysis (all 6 dimensions)
7. Recommended frameworks (with reasoning)
8. Alternative frameworks considered
9. Selection criteria applied
10. Warnings and considerations

11. Next steps

12. Offer transition:

13. "Ready to apply [Framework]? Let's use /use-framework [name]"
14. "Want to explore a different framework? I can explain the alternatives"
15. "Need to refine understanding first? Let's talk more about [dimension]"

Framework Matching Logic

By Problem Type

Strategic (long-term direction):
- Blue Ocean Strategy, Porter's Five Forces, Wardley Mapping, Scenario Planning, Ansoff Matrix, BCG Matrix

Operational (execution, processes):
- Theory of Constraints, Pareto Principle, OKR Framework, Systems Thinking, OODA Loop

Innovation (new products/services):
- Design Thinking, Lean Startup, Jobs-to-be-Done, First Principles, Blue Ocean Strategy

Decision (choosing between options):
- Mental Models, Regret Minimization, Pre-Mortem, Second-Order Thinking, Cynefin Framework

By Situation Context

Stable (clear environment):
- SWOT Analysis, Porter's Five Forces, Eisenhower Matrix, Pareto Principle

Changing (competitive, evolving):
- OODA Loop, Wardley Mapping, Blue Ocean Strategy, Scenario Planning

Uncertain (many unknowns):
- Lean Startup, Pre-Mortem Analysis, Scenario Planning, Inversion Thinking

Complex (interconnected):
- Cynefin Framework, Systems Thinking, Mental Models, First Principles

By Time Horizon

Immediate (days/weeks):
- OODA Loop, Eisenhower Matrix, Pareto Principle, Six Thinking Hats

Short-term (months):
- Design Thinking, Lean Startup, RICE Framework, OKR Framework

Long-term (years):
- Regret Minimization, Wardley Mapping, Scenario Planning, Business Model Canvas

By Role

CEO / Founder:
- Regret Minimization, Mental Models, First Principles, Porter's Five Forces, Blue Ocean Strategy

Product Manager:
- Jobs-to-be-Done, Design Thinking, Lean Startup, RICE Framework, Kano Model

Strategist:
- Porter's Five Forces, Wardley Mapping, Scenario Planning, BCG Matrix, McKinsey 7S

Operations Manager:
- Theory of Constraints, Pareto Principle, OKR Framework, Systems Thinking

Tech Leader / CTO:
- Wardley Mapping, First Principles, Systems Thinking, Theory of Constraints

Special Cases

User Knows Framework They Want

If user asks for specific framework (e.g., "I want to use Design Thinking"):

1. Validate fit: "Let me understand your situation first to make sure Design Thinking is the best fit"
2. Quick assessment: Ask 2-3 key questions about context
3. Confirm or suggest alternative:
4. If good fit: "Yes, Design Thinking is perfect for this because [reasons]. Let's use it."
5. If poor fit: "Design Thinking could work, but [Framework X] might be better because [reasons]. Which do you prefer?"

No Framework Fits Well

If none of the 48 frameworks seem right:

1. Offer closest match: "The closest fit is [Framework], though it's not perfect"
2. Suggest combination: "This might need combining [Framework A] for [aspect] and [Framework B] for [aspect]"
3. Offer discover-framework: "I don't have a perfect framework for this. Want to use /discover-framework to research and add one?"

User Wants Multiple Frameworks

If user asks "Should I use multiple frameworks?":

Answer: "It depends on complexity. Generally:
- Start with ONE framework to avoid confusion
- Apply it fully first
- Then consider complementary framework for different aspect
- Example: Porter's Five Forces (competitive analysis) → Blue Ocean Strategy (positioning)"

Output Quality Checklist

Before finalizing recommendation, verify:

• [ ] Explored all 6 dimensions (problem, context, time, stakeholders, data, complexity)
• [ ] Recommended 2-3 frameworks (not just 1)
• [ ] Explained WHY each framework fits (not just what it is)
• [ ] Considered alternatives and explained trade-offs
• [ ] Identified potential warnings or mismatches
• [ ] Created framework-selection.md with full reasoning
• [ ] Offered clear next step (use-framework)

Key Reminders

1. Don't rush to recommendation - Explore situation deeply first
2. Match evidence-based - Use selection criteria, not popularity
3. Explain reasoning - Always say WHY framework fits
4. Offer alternatives - Give user choice, not just one answer
5. Warn about mismatches - If framework is imperfect fit, say so
6. Natural dialogue - Conversational exploration, not interrogation
7. Document reasoning - Save selection process to framework-selection.md
8. Transition smoothly - Offer to apply framework via use-framework

References

• references/frameworks-index.md - All 48 frameworks with descriptions, categories, keywords
• references/framework-selection-guide.md - Deep dive on selection dimensions and criteria
• references/discovery-questions.md - Question library for exploring situation
• references/framework-warnings.md - Warning signs for mismatches and poor fits